Introduction

Federal agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service manage more than 600 million acres of public lands—28 percent of all land in the United States (Vincent and Hanson, 2020). Many of these public lands are explicitly managed to support diverse resource uses and values, including recreation, energy development, livestock grazing, forest management, conservation, and cultural preservation.

Decision making on Federal public lands is often complex and is subject to multiple laws that require the use of scientific information and the analysis of potential environmental effects. Of these laws, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) is foundational. The NEPA requires Federal agencies to analyze the potential effects of management actions that may significantly affect the environment and to consider natural and social sciences in those analyses. As a result, Federal resource management agencies may complete hundreds of environmental effects analyses (hereafter, NEPA analyses) each year. Because NEPA established a broad foundation for considering environmental effects, agencies typically conduct analyses required by other environmental statutes within the framework of the NEPA process.

Federal agencies are committed to science-informed decision making on Federal public lands (Kitchell and others, 2015; Bennetts and others, 2016; 36 CFR § 219). However, resource and public land managers face substantial hurdles in their efforts to incorporate science into decision-making processes (Carter and others, 2020, 2023). Among those hurdles are the ever-increasing number of published scientific articles (Thelwall and Sud, 2022). Agency staff may lack easy access to, or awareness of, all scientific articles on a particular topic (Oliver and others, 2014), and they often lack the time needed to find and analyze all science relevant to their decisions (Ryan and Cerveny, 2010). Additionally, many staff regularly encounter new and diverse land management issues and may not have the background knowledge to quickly synthesize science about specific topics (Bertuol-Garcia and others, 2018).

A New Method for Synthesizing Science

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has been working with other agencies to support and strengthen the use of science in public lands decision making (Carter and others, 2020). Products of these collaborations include a toolkit to help scientists and land managers work together to coproduce science products (Selby and others, 2024); a framework for identifying the types and topics of science information most needed by public land managers (Carter and others, 2023); and annotated bibliographies about priority public land management topics like Centrocercus spp. (sage-grouse; Teige and others, 2023), invasive grasses (Meineke and others, 2024), and oil and gas reclamation practices (Mann and others, 2024).

The USGS, BLM, and FWS have partnered to build on this work and develop a new type of science product: the structured science synthesis. Structured science syntheses are peer-reviewed, published reports, coproduced with resource managers, that synthesize science information about a priority management issue on public lands (fig. 1).

Key Characteristics of Structured Science Syntheses

Developed explicitly to facilitate the application of science to decision making.—The goal of structured science syntheses is to facilitate the use of high-quality science information in public lands decision making. To help achieve this goal, the syntheses are structured to align with agency decision processes. Because NEPA provides the framework that typically guides and structures agency decision making on Federal public lands, the content of the syntheses is typically tailored and formatted to support key steps of NEPA analyses (table 1).

Focused on specific resource management issues.—Priority management issues typically arise from the combination of a proposed action considered by land management agencies (such as oil and gas development, livestock grazing, or recreation) and a type of resource (such as rare plants, terrestrial wildlife, or fish) potentially affected by that action (refer to Carter and others [2023] for a list of actions and resources commonly analyzed on public lands). Issues may be narrowly focused on how an aspect of a proposed action, such as the noise or light associated with oil and gas development, may affect species or populations. Scientists and resource managers may decide to develop a synthesis on a particular issue for various reasons, including new types or large numbers of proposed actions for which environmental effects are unclear or variable, a lack of expertise in an agency on a specific topic, or large amounts of new or evolving science about a topic.

Coproduced with resource managers.—Each synthesis is coproduced with resource managers (Selby and others, 2024). The primary audiences for the syntheses are resource managers and specialists who complete NEPA analyses. Working directly with agency staff to develop each synthesis helps to ensure that the product is relevant to these end users.

Developed to include multiple types of science information needed for NEPA analyses.—Each synthesis contains four types of science information needed to support NEPA analyses on multiple-use public lands: data about actions and resources, scientific studies relevant to effects of actions on resources, methods for quantifying those effects, and measures for mitigating any adverse effects (Carter and others 2023; fig. 2). Science information provided in the synthesis is meant to complement the specific, local information on project placement and design, resource conditions, and landscape context that informs NEPA analyses. Therefore, each synthesis covers key research on the issue and leads readers to additional literature as needed.

Designed for ease of use.—The length of each synthesis varies depending on the specificity of the synthesis topic, but each synthesis includes the following sections that make the report accessible and easy for resource managers to use during NEPA analyses, regardless of the length of the document. Syntheses start with a concise executive summary that describes the core results of the synthesis and guides managers on how to use the synthesis in NEPA analyses. Syntheses also include clear section headers to help managers quickly find the information they need, and section highlight boxes to provide a snapshot of the information covered in those sections. The syntheses also include tables, figures, graphical abstracts, and photographs to help convey core information quickly and effectively to managers and other target audiences.

Developed using clear, repeatable methods.—Each synthesis is based on a review of the published literature. The methods section describes this review process and includes a list of search engines and search terms that can be used to facilitate updates of the synthesis in the future. The methods section also describes the coproduction process (Selby and others, 2024) used to develop the synthesis.

Designed to include summary findings, key details, and supplemental information.—Syntheses include summary findings from relevant research in the main body of the synthesis and may include detailed tables summarizing core results from individual studies reviewed for the synthesis. They may also contain supplemental information for agency staff to use during a NEPA analysis, including a glossary of technical terms used in the report and a step-by-step example analysis of the potential effects of a hypothetical proposed action on the resource of concern.

Together, these characteristics of structured science syntheses define a new type of science synthesis product, developed directly with and explicitly for resource managers, to support and strengthen the use of science in public lands decision making.

How to Use Structured Science Syntheses

Structured science syntheses are intended to support agency management decisions. These decisions include site-specific actions (for example, permitting an oil and gas well or constructing a recreational trail) and broader actions such as the development of resource management plans for BLM field offices. Synthesis content may be used and cited in multiple ways, including: